I don't think feature changes should be mixed with maintenance.
Code janitor is the most honourable profession, and it would be awesome for
a code janitor to convert the entire jdk to {@code but feature contributors
should not be asked to do so.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Mandy Chung <mandy.ch...@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 2/17/15 9:31 AM, Jeremy Manson wrote:
>
> Hey Mandy,
>
> Thanks for taking a look. Are we okay making those changes even though
> none of the other methods in ThreadInfo follow those conventions? Not sure
> whether consistency matters more or less than doing it right.
>
>
> I wont object and actually be grateful if you want to convert all
> <tt>...</tt> to {@code ...}. Staffan may have a different opinion.
>
> Mandy
>
>
> Jeremy
>
> On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Mandy Chung <mandy.ch...@oracle.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Jeremy,
>>
>> On 2/9/2015 4:51 PM, Jeremy Manson wrote:
>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jmanson/6588467/webrev.01/ <
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejmanson/6588467/webrev.01/>
>>>
>>>
>> The change looks okay to me.
>>
>> Nit: It would be good for the new methods to replace <tt>...</tt> with
>> {@code ...}. line 600, 603 {@code ThreadInfo}. It would be good to add
>> {@linkplain Thread#isDaemon daemon thread} or @see Thread#isDaemon .
>> Similarly Thread#getPriority.
>>
>> thanks
>> Mandy
>>
>>
>>
>
>
